13.06.2015 Views

Approaches to Quantum Gravity

Approaches to Quantum Gravity

Approaches to Quantum Gravity

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

240 T. Thiemann<br />

spectrum of all the Ĉ I , there is no non-trivial solution ∈ H Kin <strong>to</strong> the system of<br />

quantum constraint equations Ĉ I = 0 for all I which is the quantum analogue of<br />

the classical system of constraint equations C I = 0 for all I (because this would<br />

mean that is a common zero eigenvec<strong>to</strong>r). For instance, the opera<strong>to</strong>r id/dx on<br />

L 2 (R, dx) has spectrum R but none of the formal “eigenvec<strong>to</strong>rs” exp(−ikx) with<br />

eigenvalue k is normalizable. Thus, the solution <strong>to</strong> the constraints has <strong>to</strong> be unders<strong>to</strong>od<br />

differently, namely in a generalised sense. This comes at the price that the solutions<br />

must be given a new Hilbert space inner product with respect <strong>to</strong> which they are<br />

normalisable.<br />

We will now present a method <strong>to</strong> solve all the constraints and <strong>to</strong> construct an inner<br />

product induced from that of H Kin in a single stroke, see [12] and [13] formore<br />

details. Consider the Master constraint<br />

M := ∑ IJ<br />

C I K IJ C J (13.5)<br />

where K IJ is a positive definite matrix which may depend non-trivially on the phase<br />

space and which decays sufficiently fast so that M is globally defined and differentiable<br />

on M. It is called the Master constraint because obviously M = 0 ⇔ C I =<br />

0 ∀I . The concrete choice of K IJ is further guided by possible symmetry properties<br />

that M is supposed <strong>to</strong> have and by the requirement that the corresponding Master<br />

constraint opera<strong>to</strong>r ̂M is densely defined on H Kin . As a first check, consider the case<br />

that the point zero is only contained in the point spectrum of every Ĉ I and define<br />

̂M := ∑ I K I Ĉ † I ĈI where K I > 0 are positive numbers. Obviously, Ĉ I = 0 for all<br />

I implies ̂M = 0. Conversely, if ̂M = 0 then 0 =< ,̂M >= ∑ I K I ||Ĉ I || 2<br />

implies Ĉ I = 0 for all I . Hence, in the simplest case, the single Master constraint<br />

contains the same information as the system of all constraints.<br />

Let us now consider the general case and assume that ̂M has been quantised as a<br />

positive self-adjoint opera<strong>to</strong>r on H Kin . 4 Then it is a well known fact that the Hilbert<br />

space H Kin is unitarily equivalent <strong>to</strong> a direct integral of Hilbert spaces subordinate <strong>to</strong><br />

̂M, that is,<br />

H Kin<br />

∼ =<br />

∫ ⊕<br />

R + dμ(λ) H ⊕ (λ) =: H ⊕ μ,N . (13.6)<br />

Here the Hilbert spaces H ⊕ (λ) are induced from H Kin and by the choice of the<br />

measure μ and come with their own inner product. One can show that the measure<br />

class [μ] and the function class [N], where N(λ) = dim(H ⊕ (λ)) is the multiplicity<br />

of the “eigenvalue” λ, are unique 5 and in turn determine ̂M uniquely up <strong>to</strong> unitary<br />

4 Notice that ̂M is naturally quantised as a positive opera<strong>to</strong>r and that every positive opera<strong>to</strong>r has a natural selfadjoint<br />

extension, the so-called Friedrichs extension [14].<br />

5 Two measures are equivalent if they have the same measure zero sets. Two measurable functions are equivalent<br />

if they agree up <strong>to</strong> measure zero sets.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!